The report at the recent conference on "attacked the Italian landscape", held in Rome on October 25, 2007, rich interesting data. Author: Vittorio Emiliani
With EddyBurg from which I take the article. Italy is experiencing a sharp contradiction. One of the many, however, and this strikes at a time already so undermined the integrity of the Italian landscape and the quality of the already poor living conditions of lower income bassi.Registriamo fact both a consumption di suolo libero (e quindi di paesaggio) letteralmente dissennato e una vera e propria emergenza alloggi per i ceti medi, mediobassi e bassi. Segno evidente che la frenetica attività edilizia che si è andata dispiegando negli ultimi anni riguarda costruzioni destinate quasi unicamente al mercato, per lo più alla speculazione, sovente nelle zone turistiche costiere e montane, con una risalita, ora, dal mare verso l’interno, cioè verso zone di grande pregio e bellezza come ad esempio, le valli toscane, marchigiane e umbre. Basta guardare la cartina – tratta da un Annuario dell’ISTAT – la quale fissa la situazione dell’Italia a pochi anni or sono. In essa vedete come il colore marrone scuro identifichi le zone più building and the green ones free or free from cement: well between Venice and Milan has already gone green and brown dominating. But it is just one example among many possibili.Le digit carry-free attachment on land consumption in Italy are the most dramatic fact that the beautiful country I've ever lined up on the attack on the Italian landscape and the extraordinary beauty. They are the most dramatic of all Europe, without comparison. Regard the last fifteen years, along which the rate of concreting and asphalting of the soil is still free from infrastructure and construction has marched to the tune of more than 244,000 hectares per year. As never before. In fifteen years we have been so consumed with another 3 million 663 thousand hectares, that is, a region about the size of Lazio and Abruzzo combined. 195th from a region larger than the North Italy. With the recent pace can be expected within a few decades, entire regions - including the Tuscany and Lazio - are practically a desert of asphalt & concrete. This will not happen in these terms, however, and the erosion of a great heritage and irreproducible (except at enormous cost) it is henceforth assured. A real madness. Surely that will weigh on our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren. In terms of ugly, the coarsening of deterioration of the environment of life, individual and collective dissipation di un patrimonio nazionale per secoli ammirato, la più formidabile, fra l’altro, attrattiva turistico-culturale da noi posseduta.Non per caso siamo al primo posto, con la Spagna nella produzione e nel consumo di cemento, quindi con un’altra pesantissima ricaduta paesaggistica causata da cave legali e abusive per ogni dove. Nel Veneto si salvano a stento i Colli Euganei, protetti da un Parco regionale, ma altrove è un massacro, con cifre da primato. Dopo Spagna e Italia viene la Germania ma a grande distanza. Per non parlare della Francia.
Questo consumo di paesaggio – a base di cemento, asfalto e cave – non ha riscontri in Europa tranne, ripeto, che in Spagna (dove la “febbre” edilizia si sta raffreddando con pesanti contraccolpi sull’economia in generale).Esso infatti è reso impossibile da leggi illuminate nel Regno Unito (addirittura dagli anni ’30), in Germania o in Francia. E’ uscito in proposito nel luglio 2006 dall’editore Alinea un eccellente libro a cura di Maria Cristina Gibelli e di Edoardo Salzano “NO SPRAWL” che, in vari saggi, dà conto della situazione europea e nordamericana e della nostra arretratezza sul piano del dibattito e quindi delle misure da adottare.Possiamo dire che, a livello nazionale, soltanto nel programma dell’Unione c’è un accenno ad una legislazione che consenta di combattere, assieme allo sprawl, cioè al disordine urbano, il dissennato consumo di suolo. In the above volume
Maria Cristina Gibelli exposes data from a study conducted among U.S. counties sprawl sprawl and not by an eminent specialist, Richard Burchell, whereby a "controlled growth" saves 25 per cent of the land (without the 'construction activities are affected), 12.6 billion dollars in resources and water connections, sewer, etc.. (with the suburban Italian such water is instead dissipated), a 11.8 per cent in road infrastructure, a 7 per percent in the cost of local services and 6 percent in development costs immobiliare.In Germany, as witnessed in the same book, Georg Josef Frisch, "the need to reverse the trend of removal of soil the open and rural area has been recognized for the first time since the German government in 1985 under the principles of soil protection ", but in 1998 the then Environment Minister, Angela Merkel, Chancellor today, has placed ' objective of a quantitative reduction in employment of land for free urban setting the threshold to 30 hectares per day, or a quarter of the fuel in place. Objective taken from the next government rossoverde. In Germany, the land use, mind you, then traveled at a rate of 120 hectares per day, ie 43 to 44,000 hectares per year, just one-sixth of our consumption more recenti.Certo, the British model of saving land is the most old and tested as the UK, the rest of the country in which it was stronger and the early urban sprawl. But the alarm over the erosion of soil-free and / or agriculture was already done playing across the Channel in the 30s of 900 and took shape in 1946 with the New Towns Act and the following year with the Town and Planning Act Restricting Countries physical growth-enhanced Frisch always known - the identification of "green belts", namely the Green Belt. So from the point of 25,000 acres consumed in twelve months in the 30s (a pittance compared to our figures) England and Wales have fallen to just 8,000 hectares per year during the years 1985-96. Meno della metà di quanto da noi consuma in un anno la sola Toscana, tanto amata, e abitata, dagli inglesi.In una intervista che comparirà sul numero in distribuzione del trimestrale d’arte e cultura il “Terzo Occhio”, da me diretto, e redatta da Violante Pallavicino, sir Richard Rogers, celebre architetto, con origini italiane, gran consulente di Tony Blair, fa rimarcare: “Ci tengo a dire che a Londra abbiamo avuto un incremento di popolazione di 1 milione di persone in 10 anni e non abbiamo toccato un solo metro quadrato di green field, la campagna intorno alla città. Abbiamo costruito su brown field, le ex aree industriali. Dal 2001 è legge nazionale: il 70 per cento di ciò che si decide di costruire, laddove esiste, deve essere su brown field, e a Londra il sindaco Livingstone sta arrivando al 100 per cento”.
Un sogno per noi italiani proiettati in tutt’altra direzione. Sciaguratamente. La classifica delle nostre regioni in cui questa devastazione ha corso più dissennatamente lascia trasecolati. Al primo posto infatti c’è la Liguria per la quale, già negli ’60, Giorgio Bocca coniò le espressioni “Lambrate sul Tigullio” e “rapallizzazione”.Ebbene, nel quindicennio 1990-2005, la già disastrosamente cementificata Liguria è riuscita nell’impresa di “mangiarsi” quasi la metà delle superfici ancora libere. Seguita dalla Calabria che l’edilizia had already been slaughtered, especially along the coasts, and has done plenty of off-fourth of the territory still free. Mind you: the official statistics can not account for what, in Calabria and in the South, it was abusive ... I devoured the cement itself in Campania, where I fear that we have lost well more than 15.5 per cent (140 thousand hectares, however, ) soil free. Research published in the aforementioned book "NO SPRAWL" (Antonio De Gennaro and Francesco P. Flirty) speaks of an increase in the urbanized area in the region amounted to 321 per cent against 21.6 per cent population growth in the period 1960 -98. In Sicily there has been "eaten" more than a fifth of the territory not yet occupato, per cui l’isola risulta quarta in questa nera classifica, preceduta dall’Emilia-Romagna dove negli ultimi anni le gru sono fitte come una foresta, anche in zone collinari pregiate (come Bertinoro). Questa era stata una delle poche regioni a varare il piano paesaggistico voluto dalla illuminata legge Galasso del 1985. Cos’è successo da allora ad oggi? Quale mutazione genetica? Non scherzano nemmeno la Sardegna (nella quale l’attuale giunta Soru sta correndo, caso raro, ai ripari), il Lazio dove l’Agro Romano appare sempre sotto tiro, il Piemonte, la deregolata Lombardia, Abruzzo e Molise, la stessa Toscana.Ovunque vengono erosi terreni agricoli importanti, spesso i più fertili in pianura e nella prima collina per cui in tutta Italia le aree a coltivo o a prato o a bosco non costruite appaiono come terreni in attesa di reddito edilizio e non altro. La campagna diventa così periferia urbana.Fra i censimenti agricoli del 1990 e del 2000 la superficie totale, cioè libera da costruzioni e infrastrutture, è diminuita di 3,1 milioni di ettari nell’ambito dei quali 1,8 milioni erano SAU, cioè superfici agricole utilizzate. Questa situazione di grande allarme viene puntualmente confermata dalle statistiche – peraltro ferme al 2003 purtroppo – sui permessi di costruzione, quindi sull’edilizia legale, i quali per le sole residenze ammontano in quell’annata a più di 800.000 stanze, contro le 695.000 di due anni avanti. The trend of the construction industry was still growing in the last period: 2001 to present its seasonally adjusted index surged by 106.37 to nearly 129 with an increase of over 21 percent. It has been such a decisive influence on GDP. Without this "boom" of widespread construction cranes everywhere, there was in fact no growth of Gross Domestic Product, or in 2003 and 2005, the sign would have been even negativo.E 'enormously increased the volume of investment in construction Residential (58 to over 71 billion euro in the period 1999-2005) and the stock of second and third homes came to represent 1 / 5 of all existing homes: quasi 6 milioni su di un totale di 28,7 milioni di abitazioni.
Fenomeno incoraggiato dal favore col quale i Comuni hanno guardato a questa “febbre” edilizia. Favore causato dai pingui introiti che, almeno provvisoriamente (alla lunga si vedrà), le nuove costruzioni residenziali e non hanno loro consentito e che una sciagurata Finanziaria del 2001 (fissiamo bene questa data) ha loro permesso di impiegare come spesa corrente e non più soltanto come spesa per investimenti. Come prima era previsto, saggiamente dalla legge Bucalossi, e come si dovrebbe tornare a fare. Ma come per ora non si fa.Gioco pericolosissimo soprattutto in quelle regioni, come la Toscana, dove i Comuni sono stati sub-delegati alla tutela del paesaggio, loro che – especially with the cutting of resources before aflluenti from the center - they have every incentive to use the accelerator for new buildings and store the brake protection paesaggio.Un overwhelming conflict of interest on which it ends in the middle, crushed, the common good paesaggio.Tutto of what happens with an Italian population that is growing very little and claim that, if anything (young couples, immigrants, etc..), housing the new emergenzacasa economici.Ecco arise. The 11 million Italians living in rented houses - and many others who want to live - are in fact victims of a policy that has virtually abandoned for years to themselves the weaker without investing in building social, economic or other agreement (only now the Prodi government launches plan to house-EUR 550 million, but the usual breathless purchase of new housing already built to be allocated, first, the thousands of families evicted). We are far Once again, more civilized and advanced Europe. If you have the patience to scroll through the statistical annex, you will see that Italy is one of the last places such as availability of rental housing: third last with 19 percent of the total compared to 31 percent of the United Kingdom, 38 of France, 39 from Austria and Sweden, the Netherlands 45 and even 55 percent in Germany. Speech is very similar for social housing that we represent only 4 percent of the stock of housing compared with 18 in France, 21 in Sweden and the United Kingdom and the Netherlands 35. And on all the locations, of course, our share of social housing is among the more modest. Moreover, the promoters of new real estate projects are now mainly by the enterprises themselves, followed by private individuals, cooperatives, however, whose presence is halved compared to a few years ago, while public intervention in 2004 fell 1 percent to a shameful . the '70s seem remote, as the "house of mass litigation" and the Law on the house, to be precise. In parallel gallop evictions. Government and Municipalities buffered social wounds with the "bonus" (which go to homeowners in your pocket). The bank debt of Italians and immigrants has increased by leaps and bounds for the forced purchase of accommodation: from EUR 41 billion in '97 to 80 billion in 2000 to jump to 160 billion euro in 2004. With much suffering in the payment of installments (about 20 per cent) and not a few repercussions for the crisis now in place. Not like in Spain but with crunches preoccupanti.Una huge mass of savings on construction forcibly conveyed to the market or speculative for lack of viable alternatives in the rental and construction economies and populations. Savings in other advanced countries modern and has been channeled to more productive uses well: for the economy in general and for savers. Here forced to pay for a lifetime home ownership. With the setbacks that we know the landscape, even on the most conservato.Come fix it? First become aware of this mad rush to self-destruction of the beautiful country, and then launching strict laws for land use, greatly facilitating the restoration and recovery of the existing building, drafting, and especially applying prescriptive and detailed landscape plans (more plans that address the Region of Tuscany), removing the delegation to the municipalities for the protection of the landscape afforded them, improvidently, some regions (So \u200b\u200bthat you have to be very "democratic"), erasing the possibility for the same municipalities, to use the revenue from building permit, from urban development fees, etc.. to finance their current expenditure that is returning to the law Bucalossi which they can be used only for investimenti.Diversamente, with rhythms and with the perverse mechanisms present within half a century, we will have covered the whole of Italy of cement and asphalt . Really nice perspective for everyone. And also a big deal for everyone living in cultural tourism and the environment, farm, traditional agricultural products "pushed" undoubtedly also in foreign markets by the beautiful landscapes in which they are located.
A big deal for millions of people, for all. Except for real estate speculators A foolish race to the mere knowledge of the literature "no sprawl" now also disclosed by us on this side of Chiasso (remember the famous trip to Chiasso de-provincialization Arbasino a bit '?), Should result in reduce focusing on the recovery and reuse of historic centers proper housing sometimes half-empty or filled with precarious and speculative homes, premises and clubs, careful use of former industrial areas or in any case already built, and so via.E 'true that we are now "a country lost" - as we called it the Beauty of the Committee for Italy White Paper published in 2001 with the Italian Touring Club, when it was seriously engaged on these issues - but there is a limit to the displacement and destruction. There is a limit to the madness and speculation, the cancellation of the story.
FREE TOTAL AREA (in hectares) 1990 2005 Change in Change in hectares perc. ITALY
17.803.010 21,466,040 - 3,663,030 to 17.06
Piedmont 1.370.760 1,679,630 - 308,870 to 18.39
Valle d'Aosta 149.350 164,880 - 15,350 to 9.31
Liguria 249,000 135,570 to 113,430 - 45.55
Lombardia 1.233.580 1,508,601 - 275,021 to 18.23
Prov. Bolzano 548.030 564,160 - 16,130 to 2.86
Prov. Trento 440 600 452 250 11 650 2.64
Veneto 1.094.350 1,248,070 - 153,720 to 12.32
Friuli-V.Giulia 377.960 441,630 - 63,670 to 14.42
Emilia-Romagna 1.306.010 1,676,320 - 370,310 to 22.09
Tuscany 1424 1690320. 670 - 265,650 to 15.71
Umbria 593.710 661,150 - 67,440 to 10.20
Brands 682.500 773,620 - 91,120 to 11.78
Lazio 967.280 1,193,220 - 225,940 to 18.93
Abruzzo 783,290 644.520 - 138,770 to 17.72
Molise 275.040 333,620 - 58,580 to 17.56
Campania 929,890 789.890 - 140,000 to 15.05
Puglia 1.312.620 1,570,320 - 257,700 to 16.41
Basilicata 755.070 794,960 - 38,890 to 4.89
Calabria 1,031,700 762,140 - 269,560 to 26.13
Sicily 1.402.720 1,798,070 - 395,350 to 22.00
Sardinia 1,935,240 1,525,010 to 410,230 - 21.20
Source, Central Institute of Statistics
less and less farmland, 1990 AND 2000Dal agricultural census of 1990 to that of the free surface 2000la construction and infrastrutturesi decreased by 3.1 million of which 1.8 million hectares ettaridei Surface agrariaPERMESSI CONSTRUCTION IN RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS IN THE YEAR
2003Regioni AccessoriPiemonte 14,204 residential rooms (5) 52 036 447 1463 41.391Valle Aosta 1.290Lombardia 47,699 (1) 160 969 5043 17 892 143.226Trentino-Alto Adige 17.921Veneto 32,374 (2) 106 907 108.840Friuli-Venezia Giulia 23.691Liguria 7125 25468 2163 26981 7524 5.949Emilia-Romagna (3) 87,171 12,181 76.920Toscana (6) 43 936 12 068 3181 36.462Umbria 9.580Marche 7915 (10) 28 194 15 193 22.543Lazio (4) 48,188 25,347 21.360Molise 39.325Abruzzo 6662 1224 4753 8750 3.800Campania (9) 35,648 11,863 26.212Puglia (7) 46 583 1316 5693 37.709Basilicata 4.021Calabria 19.934Sicilia 6077 24 620 11 217 (8) 45 931 36 302 Sardinia 7911 (10) 28,442 808,823 22.816TOTALE ITALIA2003229.526 699.292Nord 419.228Centro 136,036 459,430 38,470 55,020 217,007 132,386 107.910Mezzogiorno 172.154TOTALE ITALIA2001189.025 695,388 755,873 602.706TOTALE ITALIA2002209.228 648.829Fonte: ISTAT 2006 Yearbook
FREE SOIL BETWEEN 1990 AND CONSUMED 2005 (in percent of the regional area) Liguria Emilia-R 45.55 26.13 22.09 Calabria Sicily Sardinia 22.00 21.20 18.93 Lazio Lombardia Piedmont 18.39 18.23 17.72 Abruzzo Molise ITALY Puglia 17.56 17.06 16.41 15.71 Tuscany Campania Friuli-VG 15.05 14.42 12.32 Veneto Marche Umbria 11.78 10.20 V. Aosta Basilicata 9.31 4.89 2.86 Prov.Bolzano Prov.Trento - ITALY-1950-2005Da 30,000,000 to 17,803,010 hectares (- * 12,196,000 hectares - 40.65 per cent) * The entire Italy North ettari.Consumo medium size 11,991,000 / year: 221,745 ettariITALIA 1990da 1950-A 30,000,000 21,446,040 hectares (- 8,533,960 hectares) Average consumption per year: 213,349 ettariITALIA 1990-2005da 21,466,040 to 17,803,010 hectares (- 3,663,030 hectares) Average consumption per year: 244,202 hectares
MAP OF HOMES IN ITALIAItaliani living in accommodation owned: 42.7 million (72.9 per cent of the total) living in Italian rented accommodation: 10.7 million (18.3 percent), Italians who live in an accommodation in another capacity (usufruct, loan, etc..): 5.2 million (8.8 percent) Source: Based on Assoedilizia Istat and Cadastre (Sole 24 Ore, 3.9.2007.) FIRST AND SECOND HOMES IN ITALIATotale homes in Italy: 28.700Abitazioni available as a first home: 22.900Abitazioni available as a second or third holiday houses: 5800 (20.2 percent of 'entire housing stock) INVESTMENT IN RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS ITALIA1999: euro2005 58 billion: more than 71 billion euroIncremento: + 23 for centoQUANTITA' AND VALUE OF BUILDING IN ITALIAValore residential heritage: 3.522 billion of euroValore Market Trading 2004: 137.2 billion Eurofonte: analysis and evaluation-ANCI CRESME
2005 POPULATION AND HOUSING IN EXISTING ROOMS ITALIAAnni Population Housing Stanze1951 47.516.000residenti11.000.000 36.300.0001991 56778000 "25000000 105.000.0002005 58,500 .000 "130.000.000Var 28,300,000. 1951-2005 + 23.1% + 157.3 + 247NB: the stock of houses and rooms should be added the legal quotadecisamente high, particularly in the area between Rome and the South, housing and stanzedel all terms. The data are drawn from the ISTAT Yearbooks. Be noted that between 1991 and 2005 the Italian population has grown only di1.722.000 people (+ 3 percent), while the number Housing increased by 13.2 per cent, and the rooms (not counting the illegal not cured) by 23.8 percent (25 million / rooms.) average rent CITY IN 'ITALIAN (in € per year for 80 sqm.) Florence 11.952Milano 11.760Roma 11.040Bologna 10.584Bari 6.024Fonte: Sample survey of tenants' Sunia, Sicet, Uilat, September 2007ABITAZIONI MADE IN ITALY WITH SUBSIDIES PUBBLICHE1984: 36.0001988: 22.0001993: 6.0002001: 5.8002004: 1.800Fonte: Based on data CRESME ISTATPROMOTORI NEW INITIATIVES FOR REAL ESTATE (as a percentage in Italy) 1984 2004Privati \u200b\u200b42Imprese 45 32 15 50Cooperative 7Pubblico 1Fonte 8: data-processing CRESME ISTATINDEBITAMENTO FOR PURCHASE OF ITALIAN THE ACCOMMODATION (in million euro) in March 1997: 41,000 September 2000: 80,000 October 2004: 160.000INDICI OF INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION AND EDILIZIA2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 var. 2001/2005Indice% of industrial production - 0.9 1.7 0.5-0 , 5 - 0.9 to 4.5 Index construction output 5.5 5.1 1.9 2.6 1.4 17.4 GDP excluding construction-Media 2001 05th Pubbl.Amm final consumption. 2.4 0.6 to 0.2 0.5 to 0.5 0.6 Source: Arnaldo Sciamarelli on Equality & Freedom November 17 2006INDICI PRODUCTION IN CONSTRUCTION * 2002: 111.22003: 114.42004, 116.82005: 117.52006: The trim 122.3: 112.1 II trim. III 130.6 trim. 112.7 IV trim. 133.92007: I trim. 123.4 II trim. 135.8 * Adjusted for working days. Source ISTAT 2007INDICI DESEASONALISATION COSTRUZIONIMedia PRODUCTION IN 2001: 106.37 2002 Media: Media 111.97 2003: 114.65 2004 Media: Media 117.35 2005: 118.20 2006 Average: 122.92 Average 2007: 128.9 (first and second quarter, preliminary estimates) % change 2001-2007: + 21.18 Source: ISTAT, quarterly production index in construction, 6 September 2007RAFFRONTI STATISTICAL INTERNAZIONALIAbitazioni rent in 2003 (in percent) Spain 11Irlanda 18Italia 19Grecia 20Regno Kingdom, Belgium and Sweden 31Francia 38Austria 39Olanda 45Germania 55Fonte: CRESMEIncidenze processing rates of social housing on capital leases at 2005Sulle abitativoSpagna 12 1Italia 4Germania 21 13 45 7Irlanda 8Austria 14Francia 35 46 68 21Svezia 18Regno Kingdom 45 21Olanda 77 35Fonte: processing CRESMEPREZZI PURCHASE OF APARTMENTS IN CENTRAL ZONE (EUR per sqm.) Min Max.New York 10,000 10,500 16.500Londra 16.000Parigi 11.000Zurigo 8200 5600 5800 9.250Monaco 8.500Roma 8.400Milano 6100 5300 4500 7.200Ginevra 7.050Francoforte 5.750Vienna 4400 4000 3600 7.000Stoccolma 5.550Madrid 5.200Berlino 3800 3500 2600 4.350Amsterdam 3.850Bruxelles 2.900Helsinki 2550 1800 2.500Copenhagen 2.450Fonte 1700: development of "Il Sole 24 Ore, October 2007PRODUZIONE CONCRETE IN EUROPE 2004 (million tonnes), Spain 46.60 Italy 46.05 (including 47.8% in the North) 35.77 Scandinavia Germany 33 , 40Francia 21.54 12.01 United Kingdom Austria Benelux 11.03 Turkey 4.03 10.16 41.26 Other EU Source: Association European Cement
With EddyBurg from which I take the article. Italy is experiencing a sharp contradiction. One of the many, however, and this strikes at a time already so undermined the integrity of the Italian landscape and the quality of the already poor living conditions of lower income bassi.Registriamo fact both a consumption di suolo libero (e quindi di paesaggio) letteralmente dissennato e una vera e propria emergenza alloggi per i ceti medi, mediobassi e bassi. Segno evidente che la frenetica attività edilizia che si è andata dispiegando negli ultimi anni riguarda costruzioni destinate quasi unicamente al mercato, per lo più alla speculazione, sovente nelle zone turistiche costiere e montane, con una risalita, ora, dal mare verso l’interno, cioè verso zone di grande pregio e bellezza come ad esempio, le valli toscane, marchigiane e umbre. Basta guardare la cartina – tratta da un Annuario dell’ISTAT – la quale fissa la situazione dell’Italia a pochi anni or sono. In essa vedete come il colore marrone scuro identifichi le zone più building and the green ones free or free from cement: well between Venice and Milan has already gone green and brown dominating. But it is just one example among many possibili.Le digit carry-free attachment on land consumption in Italy are the most dramatic fact that the beautiful country I've ever lined up on the attack on the Italian landscape and the extraordinary beauty. They are the most dramatic of all Europe, without comparison. Regard the last fifteen years, along which the rate of concreting and asphalting of the soil is still free from infrastructure and construction has marched to the tune of more than 244,000 hectares per year. As never before. In fifteen years we have been so consumed with another 3 million 663 thousand hectares, that is, a region about the size of Lazio and Abruzzo combined. 195th from a region larger than the North Italy. With the recent pace can be expected within a few decades, entire regions - including the Tuscany and Lazio - are practically a desert of asphalt & concrete. This will not happen in these terms, however, and the erosion of a great heritage and irreproducible (except at enormous cost) it is henceforth assured. A real madness. Surely that will weigh on our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren. In terms of ugly, the coarsening of deterioration of the environment of life, individual and collective dissipation di un patrimonio nazionale per secoli ammirato, la più formidabile, fra l’altro, attrattiva turistico-culturale da noi posseduta.Non per caso siamo al primo posto, con la Spagna nella produzione e nel consumo di cemento, quindi con un’altra pesantissima ricaduta paesaggistica causata da cave legali e abusive per ogni dove. Nel Veneto si salvano a stento i Colli Euganei, protetti da un Parco regionale, ma altrove è un massacro, con cifre da primato. Dopo Spagna e Italia viene la Germania ma a grande distanza. Per non parlare della Francia.
Questo consumo di paesaggio – a base di cemento, asfalto e cave – non ha riscontri in Europa tranne, ripeto, che in Spagna (dove la “febbre” edilizia si sta raffreddando con pesanti contraccolpi sull’economia in generale).Esso infatti è reso impossibile da leggi illuminate nel Regno Unito (addirittura dagli anni ’30), in Germania o in Francia. E’ uscito in proposito nel luglio 2006 dall’editore Alinea un eccellente libro a cura di Maria Cristina Gibelli e di Edoardo Salzano “NO SPRAWL” che, in vari saggi, dà conto della situazione europea e nordamericana e della nostra arretratezza sul piano del dibattito e quindi delle misure da adottare.Possiamo dire che, a livello nazionale, soltanto nel programma dell’Unione c’è un accenno ad una legislazione che consenta di combattere, assieme allo sprawl, cioè al disordine urbano, il dissennato consumo di suolo. In the above volume
Maria Cristina Gibelli exposes data from a study conducted among U.S. counties sprawl sprawl and not by an eminent specialist, Richard Burchell, whereby a "controlled growth" saves 25 per cent of the land (without the 'construction activities are affected), 12.6 billion dollars in resources and water connections, sewer, etc.. (with the suburban Italian such water is instead dissipated), a 11.8 per cent in road infrastructure, a 7 per percent in the cost of local services and 6 percent in development costs immobiliare.In Germany, as witnessed in the same book, Georg Josef Frisch, "the need to reverse the trend of removal of soil the open and rural area has been recognized for the first time since the German government in 1985 under the principles of soil protection ", but in 1998 the then Environment Minister, Angela Merkel, Chancellor today, has placed ' objective of a quantitative reduction in employment of land for free urban setting the threshold to 30 hectares per day, or a quarter of the fuel in place. Objective taken from the next government rossoverde. In Germany, the land use, mind you, then traveled at a rate of 120 hectares per day, ie 43 to 44,000 hectares per year, just one-sixth of our consumption more recenti.Certo, the British model of saving land is the most old and tested as the UK, the rest of the country in which it was stronger and the early urban sprawl. But the alarm over the erosion of soil-free and / or agriculture was already done playing across the Channel in the 30s of 900 and took shape in 1946 with the New Towns Act and the following year with the Town and Planning Act Restricting Countries physical growth-enhanced Frisch always known - the identification of "green belts", namely the Green Belt. So from the point of 25,000 acres consumed in twelve months in the 30s (a pittance compared to our figures) England and Wales have fallen to just 8,000 hectares per year during the years 1985-96. Meno della metà di quanto da noi consuma in un anno la sola Toscana, tanto amata, e abitata, dagli inglesi.In una intervista che comparirà sul numero in distribuzione del trimestrale d’arte e cultura il “Terzo Occhio”, da me diretto, e redatta da Violante Pallavicino, sir Richard Rogers, celebre architetto, con origini italiane, gran consulente di Tony Blair, fa rimarcare: “Ci tengo a dire che a Londra abbiamo avuto un incremento di popolazione di 1 milione di persone in 10 anni e non abbiamo toccato un solo metro quadrato di green field, la campagna intorno alla città. Abbiamo costruito su brown field, le ex aree industriali. Dal 2001 è legge nazionale: il 70 per cento di ciò che si decide di costruire, laddove esiste, deve essere su brown field, e a Londra il sindaco Livingstone sta arrivando al 100 per cento”.
Un sogno per noi italiani proiettati in tutt’altra direzione. Sciaguratamente. La classifica delle nostre regioni in cui questa devastazione ha corso più dissennatamente lascia trasecolati. Al primo posto infatti c’è la Liguria per la quale, già negli ’60, Giorgio Bocca coniò le espressioni “Lambrate sul Tigullio” e “rapallizzazione”.Ebbene, nel quindicennio 1990-2005, la già disastrosamente cementificata Liguria è riuscita nell’impresa di “mangiarsi” quasi la metà delle superfici ancora libere. Seguita dalla Calabria che l’edilizia had already been slaughtered, especially along the coasts, and has done plenty of off-fourth of the territory still free. Mind you: the official statistics can not account for what, in Calabria and in the South, it was abusive ... I devoured the cement itself in Campania, where I fear that we have lost well more than 15.5 per cent (140 thousand hectares, however, ) soil free. Research published in the aforementioned book "NO SPRAWL" (Antonio De Gennaro and Francesco P. Flirty) speaks of an increase in the urbanized area in the region amounted to 321 per cent against 21.6 per cent population growth in the period 1960 -98. In Sicily there has been "eaten" more than a fifth of the territory not yet occupato, per cui l’isola risulta quarta in questa nera classifica, preceduta dall’Emilia-Romagna dove negli ultimi anni le gru sono fitte come una foresta, anche in zone collinari pregiate (come Bertinoro). Questa era stata una delle poche regioni a varare il piano paesaggistico voluto dalla illuminata legge Galasso del 1985. Cos’è successo da allora ad oggi? Quale mutazione genetica? Non scherzano nemmeno la Sardegna (nella quale l’attuale giunta Soru sta correndo, caso raro, ai ripari), il Lazio dove l’Agro Romano appare sempre sotto tiro, il Piemonte, la deregolata Lombardia, Abruzzo e Molise, la stessa Toscana.Ovunque vengono erosi terreni agricoli importanti, spesso i più fertili in pianura e nella prima collina per cui in tutta Italia le aree a coltivo o a prato o a bosco non costruite appaiono come terreni in attesa di reddito edilizio e non altro. La campagna diventa così periferia urbana.Fra i censimenti agricoli del 1990 e del 2000 la superficie totale, cioè libera da costruzioni e infrastrutture, è diminuita di 3,1 milioni di ettari nell’ambito dei quali 1,8 milioni erano SAU, cioè superfici agricole utilizzate. Questa situazione di grande allarme viene puntualmente confermata dalle statistiche – peraltro ferme al 2003 purtroppo – sui permessi di costruzione, quindi sull’edilizia legale, i quali per le sole residenze ammontano in quell’annata a più di 800.000 stanze, contro le 695.000 di due anni avanti. The trend of the construction industry was still growing in the last period: 2001 to present its seasonally adjusted index surged by 106.37 to nearly 129 with an increase of over 21 percent. It has been such a decisive influence on GDP. Without this "boom" of widespread construction cranes everywhere, there was in fact no growth of Gross Domestic Product, or in 2003 and 2005, the sign would have been even negativo.E 'enormously increased the volume of investment in construction Residential (58 to over 71 billion euro in the period 1999-2005) and the stock of second and third homes came to represent 1 / 5 of all existing homes: quasi 6 milioni su di un totale di 28,7 milioni di abitazioni.
Fenomeno incoraggiato dal favore col quale i Comuni hanno guardato a questa “febbre” edilizia. Favore causato dai pingui introiti che, almeno provvisoriamente (alla lunga si vedrà), le nuove costruzioni residenziali e non hanno loro consentito e che una sciagurata Finanziaria del 2001 (fissiamo bene questa data) ha loro permesso di impiegare come spesa corrente e non più soltanto come spesa per investimenti. Come prima era previsto, saggiamente dalla legge Bucalossi, e come si dovrebbe tornare a fare. Ma come per ora non si fa.Gioco pericolosissimo soprattutto in quelle regioni, come la Toscana, dove i Comuni sono stati sub-delegati alla tutela del paesaggio, loro che – especially with the cutting of resources before aflluenti from the center - they have every incentive to use the accelerator for new buildings and store the brake protection paesaggio.Un overwhelming conflict of interest on which it ends in the middle, crushed, the common good paesaggio.Tutto of what happens with an Italian population that is growing very little and claim that, if anything (young couples, immigrants, etc..), housing the new emergenzacasa economici.Ecco arise. The 11 million Italians living in rented houses - and many others who want to live - are in fact victims of a policy that has virtually abandoned for years to themselves the weaker without investing in building social, economic or other agreement (only now the Prodi government launches plan to house-EUR 550 million, but the usual breathless purchase of new housing already built to be allocated, first, the thousands of families evicted). We are far Once again, more civilized and advanced Europe. If you have the patience to scroll through the statistical annex, you will see that Italy is one of the last places such as availability of rental housing: third last with 19 percent of the total compared to 31 percent of the United Kingdom, 38 of France, 39 from Austria and Sweden, the Netherlands 45 and even 55 percent in Germany. Speech is very similar for social housing that we represent only 4 percent of the stock of housing compared with 18 in France, 21 in Sweden and the United Kingdom and the Netherlands 35. And on all the locations, of course, our share of social housing is among the more modest. Moreover, the promoters of new real estate projects are now mainly by the enterprises themselves, followed by private individuals, cooperatives, however, whose presence is halved compared to a few years ago, while public intervention in 2004 fell 1 percent to a shameful . the '70s seem remote, as the "house of mass litigation" and the Law on the house, to be precise. In parallel gallop evictions. Government and Municipalities buffered social wounds with the "bonus" (which go to homeowners in your pocket). The bank debt of Italians and immigrants has increased by leaps and bounds for the forced purchase of accommodation: from EUR 41 billion in '97 to 80 billion in 2000 to jump to 160 billion euro in 2004. With much suffering in the payment of installments (about 20 per cent) and not a few repercussions for the crisis now in place. Not like in Spain but with crunches preoccupanti.Una huge mass of savings on construction forcibly conveyed to the market or speculative for lack of viable alternatives in the rental and construction economies and populations. Savings in other advanced countries modern and has been channeled to more productive uses well: for the economy in general and for savers. Here forced to pay for a lifetime home ownership. With the setbacks that we know the landscape, even on the most conservato.Come fix it? First become aware of this mad rush to self-destruction of the beautiful country, and then launching strict laws for land use, greatly facilitating the restoration and recovery of the existing building, drafting, and especially applying prescriptive and detailed landscape plans (more plans that address the Region of Tuscany), removing the delegation to the municipalities for the protection of the landscape afforded them, improvidently, some regions (So \u200b\u200bthat you have to be very "democratic"), erasing the possibility for the same municipalities, to use the revenue from building permit, from urban development fees, etc.. to finance their current expenditure that is returning to the law Bucalossi which they can be used only for investimenti.Diversamente, with rhythms and with the perverse mechanisms present within half a century, we will have covered the whole of Italy of cement and asphalt . Really nice perspective for everyone. And also a big deal for everyone living in cultural tourism and the environment, farm, traditional agricultural products "pushed" undoubtedly also in foreign markets by the beautiful landscapes in which they are located.
A big deal for millions of people, for all. Except for real estate speculators A foolish race to the mere knowledge of the literature "no sprawl" now also disclosed by us on this side of Chiasso (remember the famous trip to Chiasso de-provincialization Arbasino a bit '?), Should result in reduce focusing on the recovery and reuse of historic centers proper housing sometimes half-empty or filled with precarious and speculative homes, premises and clubs, careful use of former industrial areas or in any case already built, and so via.E 'true that we are now "a country lost" - as we called it the Beauty of the Committee for Italy White Paper published in 2001 with the Italian Touring Club, when it was seriously engaged on these issues - but there is a limit to the displacement and destruction. There is a limit to the madness and speculation, the cancellation of the story.
FREE TOTAL AREA (in hectares) 1990 2005 Change in Change in hectares perc. ITALY
17.803.010 21,466,040 - 3,663,030 to 17.06
Piedmont 1.370.760 1,679,630 - 308,870 to 18.39
Valle d'Aosta 149.350 164,880 - 15,350 to 9.31
Liguria 249,000 135,570 to 113,430 - 45.55
Lombardia 1.233.580 1,508,601 - 275,021 to 18.23
Prov. Bolzano 548.030 564,160 - 16,130 to 2.86
Prov. Trento 440 600 452 250 11 650 2.64
Veneto 1.094.350 1,248,070 - 153,720 to 12.32
Friuli-V.Giulia 377.960 441,630 - 63,670 to 14.42
Emilia-Romagna 1.306.010 1,676,320 - 370,310 to 22.09
Tuscany 1424 1690320. 670 - 265,650 to 15.71
Umbria 593.710 661,150 - 67,440 to 10.20
Brands 682.500 773,620 - 91,120 to 11.78
Lazio 967.280 1,193,220 - 225,940 to 18.93
Abruzzo 783,290 644.520 - 138,770 to 17.72
Molise 275.040 333,620 - 58,580 to 17.56
Campania 929,890 789.890 - 140,000 to 15.05
Puglia 1.312.620 1,570,320 - 257,700 to 16.41
Basilicata 755.070 794,960 - 38,890 to 4.89
Calabria 1,031,700 762,140 - 269,560 to 26.13
Sicily 1.402.720 1,798,070 - 395,350 to 22.00
Sardinia 1,935,240 1,525,010 to 410,230 - 21.20
Source, Central Institute of Statistics
less and less farmland, 1990 AND 2000Dal agricultural census of 1990 to that of the free surface 2000la construction and infrastrutturesi decreased by 3.1 million of which 1.8 million hectares ettaridei Surface agrariaPERMESSI CONSTRUCTION IN RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS IN THE YEAR
2003Regioni AccessoriPiemonte 14,204 residential rooms (5) 52 036 447 1463 41.391Valle Aosta 1.290Lombardia 47,699 (1) 160 969 5043 17 892 143.226Trentino-Alto Adige 17.921Veneto 32,374 (2) 106 907 108.840Friuli-Venezia Giulia 23.691Liguria 7125 25468 2163 26981 7524 5.949Emilia-Romagna (3) 87,171 12,181 76.920Toscana (6) 43 936 12 068 3181 36.462Umbria 9.580Marche 7915 (10) 28 194 15 193 22.543Lazio (4) 48,188 25,347 21.360Molise 39.325Abruzzo 6662 1224 4753 8750 3.800Campania (9) 35,648 11,863 26.212Puglia (7) 46 583 1316 5693 37.709Basilicata 4.021Calabria 19.934Sicilia 6077 24 620 11 217 (8) 45 931 36 302 Sardinia 7911 (10) 28,442 808,823 22.816TOTALE ITALIA2003229.526 699.292Nord 419.228Centro 136,036 459,430 38,470 55,020 217,007 132,386 107.910Mezzogiorno 172.154TOTALE ITALIA2001189.025 695,388 755,873 602.706TOTALE ITALIA2002209.228 648.829Fonte: ISTAT 2006 Yearbook
FREE SOIL BETWEEN 1990 AND CONSUMED 2005 (in percent of the regional area) Liguria Emilia-R 45.55 26.13 22.09 Calabria Sicily Sardinia 22.00 21.20 18.93 Lazio Lombardia Piedmont 18.39 18.23 17.72 Abruzzo Molise ITALY Puglia 17.56 17.06 16.41 15.71 Tuscany Campania Friuli-VG 15.05 14.42 12.32 Veneto Marche Umbria 11.78 10.20 V. Aosta Basilicata 9.31 4.89 2.86 Prov.Bolzano Prov.Trento - ITALY-1950-2005Da 30,000,000 to 17,803,010 hectares (- * 12,196,000 hectares - 40.65 per cent) * The entire Italy North ettari.Consumo medium size 11,991,000 / year: 221,745 ettariITALIA 1990da 1950-A 30,000,000 21,446,040 hectares (- 8,533,960 hectares) Average consumption per year: 213,349 ettariITALIA 1990-2005da 21,466,040 to 17,803,010 hectares (- 3,663,030 hectares) Average consumption per year: 244,202 hectares
MAP OF HOMES IN ITALIAItaliani living in accommodation owned: 42.7 million (72.9 per cent of the total) living in Italian rented accommodation: 10.7 million (18.3 percent), Italians who live in an accommodation in another capacity (usufruct, loan, etc..): 5.2 million (8.8 percent) Source: Based on Assoedilizia Istat and Cadastre (Sole 24 Ore, 3.9.2007.) FIRST AND SECOND HOMES IN ITALIATotale homes in Italy: 28.700Abitazioni available as a first home: 22.900Abitazioni available as a second or third holiday houses: 5800 (20.2 percent of 'entire housing stock) INVESTMENT IN RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS ITALIA1999: euro2005 58 billion: more than 71 billion euroIncremento: + 23 for centoQUANTITA' AND VALUE OF BUILDING IN ITALIAValore residential heritage: 3.522 billion of euroValore Market Trading 2004: 137.2 billion Eurofonte: analysis and evaluation-ANCI CRESME
2005 POPULATION AND HOUSING IN EXISTING ROOMS ITALIAAnni Population Housing Stanze1951 47.516.000residenti11.000.000 36.300.0001991 56778000 "25000000 105.000.0002005 58,500 .000 "130.000.000Var 28,300,000. 1951-2005 + 23.1% + 157.3 + 247NB: the stock of houses and rooms should be added the legal quotadecisamente high, particularly in the area between Rome and the South, housing and stanzedel all terms. The data are drawn from the ISTAT Yearbooks. Be noted that between 1991 and 2005 the Italian population has grown only di1.722.000 people (+ 3 percent), while the number Housing increased by 13.2 per cent, and the rooms (not counting the illegal not cured) by 23.8 percent (25 million / rooms.) average rent CITY IN 'ITALIAN (in € per year for 80 sqm.) Florence 11.952Milano 11.760Roma 11.040Bologna 10.584Bari 6.024Fonte: Sample survey of tenants' Sunia, Sicet, Uilat, September 2007ABITAZIONI MADE IN ITALY WITH SUBSIDIES PUBBLICHE1984: 36.0001988: 22.0001993: 6.0002001: 5.8002004: 1.800Fonte: Based on data CRESME ISTATPROMOTORI NEW INITIATIVES FOR REAL ESTATE (as a percentage in Italy) 1984 2004Privati \u200b\u200b42Imprese 45 32 15 50Cooperative 7Pubblico 1Fonte 8: data-processing CRESME ISTATINDEBITAMENTO FOR PURCHASE OF ITALIAN THE ACCOMMODATION (in million euro) in March 1997: 41,000 September 2000: 80,000 October 2004: 160.000INDICI OF INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION AND EDILIZIA2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 var. 2001/2005Indice% of industrial production - 0.9 1.7 0.5-0 , 5 - 0.9 to 4.5 Index construction output 5.5 5.1 1.9 2.6 1.4 17.4 GDP excluding construction-Media 2001 05th Pubbl.Amm final consumption. 2.4 0.6 to 0.2 0.5 to 0.5 0.6 Source: Arnaldo Sciamarelli on Equality & Freedom November 17 2006INDICI PRODUCTION IN CONSTRUCTION * 2002: 111.22003: 114.42004, 116.82005: 117.52006: The trim 122.3: 112.1 II trim. III 130.6 trim. 112.7 IV trim. 133.92007: I trim. 123.4 II trim. 135.8 * Adjusted for working days. Source ISTAT 2007INDICI DESEASONALISATION COSTRUZIONIMedia PRODUCTION IN 2001: 106.37 2002 Media: Media 111.97 2003: 114.65 2004 Media: Media 117.35 2005: 118.20 2006 Average: 122.92 Average 2007: 128.9 (first and second quarter, preliminary estimates) % change 2001-2007: + 21.18 Source: ISTAT, quarterly production index in construction, 6 September 2007RAFFRONTI STATISTICAL INTERNAZIONALIAbitazioni rent in 2003 (in percent) Spain 11Irlanda 18Italia 19Grecia 20Regno Kingdom, Belgium and Sweden 31Francia 38Austria 39Olanda 45Germania 55Fonte: CRESMEIncidenze processing rates of social housing on capital leases at 2005Sulle abitativoSpagna 12 1Italia 4Germania 21 13 45 7Irlanda 8Austria 14Francia 35 46 68 21Svezia 18Regno Kingdom 45 21Olanda 77 35Fonte: processing CRESMEPREZZI PURCHASE OF APARTMENTS IN CENTRAL ZONE (EUR per sqm.) Min Max.New York 10,000 10,500 16.500Londra 16.000Parigi 11.000Zurigo 8200 5600 5800 9.250Monaco 8.500Roma 8.400Milano 6100 5300 4500 7.200Ginevra 7.050Francoforte 5.750Vienna 4400 4000 3600 7.000Stoccolma 5.550Madrid 5.200Berlino 3800 3500 2600 4.350Amsterdam 3.850Bruxelles 2.900Helsinki 2550 1800 2.500Copenhagen 2.450Fonte 1700: development of "Il Sole 24 Ore, October 2007PRODUZIONE CONCRETE IN EUROPE 2004 (million tonnes), Spain 46.60 Italy 46.05 (including 47.8% in the North) 35.77 Scandinavia Germany 33 , 40Francia 21.54 12.01 United Kingdom Austria Benelux 11.03 Turkey 4.03 10.16 41.26 Other EU Source: Association European Cement
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Agjqz5B57KU 
0 comments:
Post a Comment